If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed." Albert Einstein

I can't believe I'm discussing this BUT:
When time travellers stepped out of their time machine, where were they?
What did they make it out of?
How did they survive long enough to make it?
and most importantly, it has been proven that time travel can only go backwards to the point where there was a "time machine" to exit from and that they would work more like portals than physical objects that transported themselves and their contents. So as a result, where was the exit portal?

Life begins as a quest of the child for the man and ends as a journey by the man to rediscover the child.

I am not one that believes that if there was no universe there would be an emptyness we can not possibly think of. No I think it would just be empty space perhaps with the ball of concentrated matter that has existed for all time that is discussed in the big band thoery but there thoery falls apart with there "super force" that rips it apart. I suggest that time travelers just go outside the ball and pant some sort of device to rip it apart.

This is some sort of race that is able to time travel to whenever they want to without anything that we are even capable of thinking of that doesn't break any laws of physics that we can think of and perhaps breaking many of those laws that aren't as stable as we think becuase its been prooven that black holes break many of our laws of physics.

black holes dont really break any of the laws of physics. einsteins relativity equations just reach a singularity because black holes are assumed to have an infinite mass density. because we have an ambiguous knowledge of black holes doesnt disprove the laws of physics.

This is some sort of race that is able to time travel to whenever they want to without anything that we are even capable of thinking of that doesn't break any laws of physics that we can think of and perhaps breaking many of those laws that aren't as stable as we think becuase its been prooven that black holes break many of our laws of physics.

it's ambiguous. no one knows exactly what happens inside a black hole because mathematics cannot solve equations with an exorbitant number of infinities involved. its a conundrum yes and it is a drawback of general relativity but it doesn't necessarily violate the laws of physics because that's how science works. every theory has certain limitations which are addressed and improved upon by succeeding theories but this doesn't mean the prior theories are invalid. for example relativity nullifies the need for newtons law of gravity but it's more complex and for objects of reasonable sizes the traditional expressions of gravity are still used. eventually th behaviour of spacetime within a black hole will be explained by a new hypothesis (i think m-theory already does but not too sure).

Basically, to make what Rayne is saying easier to understand. Black Holes are really big and we can't put a number on how big they are so we say it is infinitely big even though it blatently isn't. As a result maths doesn't work because it doesn't like infinite. Wormholes are excuses made by people who can't say what actually happens, which is why the have no real evidence about anything at all.

Life begins as a quest of the child for the man and ends as a journey by the man to rediscover the child.

Black Holes are really big and we can't put a number on how big they are so we say it is infinitely big even though it blatently isn't.

on the contrary black holes are infinitesimally small but have an assumed infinite gravity because of an assumed infinite mass which results from an assumed infinite density. infinity is mathematically defined as an arbitrarily large number but that doesnt help much with dealing with actual equations. to make matters worse in addition to the singularity, the two main theories of science: relativity (dealing with macroscopic objects with appreciable gravity) and quantum mechanics (dealing with molecular sizes and negligible gravity) are incompatible with each other and black holes are very small but also have a massive gravity so it presents another scientific conundrum.

Wormholes are excuses made by people who can't say what actually happens, which is why the have no real evidence about anything at all.

not sure where i said this. wormholes arent an explanation to anything and dont serve as an explanation to anything; theyre just fun to think about and theoretically, according to certain theories at least, wormholes can definitely exist but so far practical evidence has not been found to support any of those theories.

Black holes don't have "infinite gravity" if they would then everything would be effected by every black hole and thats just not the case. They have very large gravity not infinite. And some black holes are "bigger" then others or atleast the gravitational range they have is bigger. For example the average range or a normal black hole is a solarsystem while a super massive black hole has a gravitational range of an entire galaxy.

No. The gravitational force of a black hole is something that can be calculated as an exact number. The only infinite thing about it is its density and size. Everything else is something tangenble or else everything would be sucked into it.

Thats like saying from looking at a vacuum that it has an infinite sucking force when you know there are things that suck harder.

kirby consider a stretched out blanket. when you put objects on the blanket, the blanket curves around that particular object because of its weight creating a depth. in traditional cases like stars even if they have an enormous mass, they are large enough to make the 'curve' a relatively gentle slope. thus gravitational attraction is more or less uniform. that isnt the case with black holes. because they have gigantic masses but are incredibly densely occupied into a minuscule region of space, there comes a point where the 'curve', which starts out comparable to any star, suddenly drops and tends to be nearly vertical ultimately reaching a point where volume equals zero. that region where the curve becomes extremely steep is the event horizon. you cant put a number on the gravitational force at the event horizon because it leads to a singularity. you can find out the mass, you can calculate to an arbitrary amount of accuracy the surface gravity of a black holes as compared to an object placed at infinity (which obviously lies outside the event horizon) but within the event horizon, for all intents and purposes, gravity is infinite.